Enough is never enough: so you think there are too many bowl games? Our writer begs to differ. Bring on more, he says - Commentary

Football Digest, Feb, 2003 by Joe Donatelli

WE NEED MORE BOWL GAMES.

You read that right

We need more bowl games.

Now you're expecting some type of sarcastic comment, a regurgitated bit of conventional sports-radio wisdom that says, "Twenty-eight bowl games is too many! Who can keep track? Enough!"

You won't hear that from me.

I say the more the merrier.

Turns out I'm not alone. I recently spoke with Northern Illinois University head coach Joe Novak, and he says the more the merrier, too.

The Huskies play in the Mid-American Conference, which receives an automatic bid to the Ford Motor City Bowl, a 50-50 shot at the GMAC Bowl, and a when-Mars-lines-up-with-Venus-on-the-winter-solstice chance at a few others. Novak, who at times sounds more like a stat-spouting college football fan than a Division I head coach, has heard every argument against more bowl games:

* The "little" bowls lessen the prestige of the big bowls.

* It's too hard for fans to follow all the games.

* A 7-5 team should not be rewarded with a postseason game.

* The quality of play in the lesser bowls isn't very good.

Novak isn't buying any of it.

"I've been coaching a long time, and I've never been to a bad bowl game," says Novak, who has coached in a total of nine bowl games, at Miami (Ohio), Indiana, and Northern Illinois. "Bowl games are like ice cream, you know? They're always good. It's a great experience for the players and for the school.

"From a fan's perspective, I can see how you can get caught up in the Heisman poll and who's No. 1 and following the elite teams. You might say things like, `There are too many bowls.' But for a team that doesn't get much recognition and has a pretty good year, there is nothing like a bowl game. You could send us to Alaska. We'd go."

At this point, you might ask yourself why any man would want to leave the contiguous 48 for a bowl game not played on a tropical island. The answer is simple: exposure.

In college football--in which the same 15 to 20 teams fight for a national title every year--bowls can be the great equalizer. While it's well documented that many bowls do not generate money for participating schools, in terms of exposure they're pure gold.

The Mid-American, which is not one of the six Bowl Championship Series conferences, is so eager for national exposure that last year its university presidents voted to pay for Marshall's and Toledo's trips to the GMAC and Ford Motor City Bowls.

As far as the conference is concerned, it was a solid investment. Both teams won and finished in the top 25, the first time since the inception of the BCS that a non-BCS conference landed two schools in the final polls.

Such positive national exposure helps recruiting, alumni donations, and future TV and bowl deals. At some schools, a bowl appearance is followed by an increase in admissions applications.

In the long run, increased bowl opportunities for smaller conferences could level the college football playing field. Right now, the six BCS conferences (the Big Ten, SEC, Big 12, Pac-10, Big East, and ACC), as well as Notre Dame, earn the lion's share of television revenue and media exposure.

But a bowl-laden postseason that can generate exposure today, dollars tomorrow, and clout in the long run is beneficial to conferences such as the Mid-American, Western Athletic, Conference USA, Sun Belt, and Mountain West.

Mid-American Conference commissioner Rick Chryst says as many as two more bowls might be added to the next postseason, with the possibility of others being shuffled geographically. "The bowl landscape is still developing," Chryst said from Huntington, W.Va., hours before kickoff of a nationally televised game between Marshall and Miami (Ohio) in November.

The game was played on a Tuesday night.

Exposure.

GMAC Bowl president Jerry Silverstein has an answer for all those folks who want the NCAA to put a cap on how many bowl games can be played. "The strong will survive," says Silverstein, whose bowl features the No. 2 Conference USA team vs. a MAC/WAC representative.

This is the built-in beauty of the current system. Lackluster bowls that are unnecessary and lose money will die. To openly call for their elimination is an exercise in redundancy and elitism.

"If you have the support of a community and the backing of the conferences, you have a bowl game," Silverstein says. "The NCAA decides which schools are eligible, If a school is eligible, why shouldn't it have the opportunity to go to a bowl game?"

One common argument against creating more bowl games is that it celebrates a poorer quality of play. This couldn't be further from the truth.

If last year's bowl games proved anything, it's that you're more likely to see a close, exciting game in middle to late December--when the "little" bowls are played--than on New Year's Day or January 2 or 3. Last season, the average margin of victory in the four highly touted BCS bowls was 22.3 points; the closest game was decided by 13 points. The average margin of victory for all the other bowl games was 11.4 points, 11 of which were decided by eight points or fewer.